Dick's Sporting Goods Destroys $5M Worth Of 'Assault-Style' Rifles

Dick's Sporting Goods has destroyed $5 million in "assault-style rifles" and lost about a quarter of a billion dollars.

Coraopolis, PA – Dick’s Sporting Goods has turned $5 million worth of “assault-style rifles” into scrap metal since the chain pulled the firearms from its shelves in 2018.

"I said, 'You know what? If we really think these things should be off the street, we need to destroy them,'" Dick’s Sporting Goods CEO Ed Stack told CBS News on Sunday.

The company ended the sale of “assault-style rifles, also referred to as modern sporting rifles” on Feb. 28, 2018, in the wake of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School massacre in Parkland, Florida, according to a press release at the time.

“We at DICK’S Sporting Goods are deeply disturbed and saddened by the tragic events in Parkland,” the company said, referring to the Valentine’s Day high school shooting that left 17 people dead and another 17 wounded. “We support and respect the Second Amendment, and we recognize and appreciate that the vast majority of gun owners in this country are responsible, law-abiding citizens. But we have to help solve the problem that’s in front of us.”

Instead of returning the unsold merchandise to manufacturers, Dick’s has been destroying the weapons at their distribution centers and then sent the parts to a salvage company to be recycled, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported.

These rifles have not been available through any Dick’s outlets since the Sandy Hook massacre in 2012, but were still being sold at the company’s 35 Field & Stream stores.

"All we were going to do was just take [AR-15’s] off the shelf and not say anything," Stack said of the 2012 decision, according to CBS News.

Stack said he expected “backlash” over that move, but that he “didn’t expect what we got,” CBS News reported.

"All this about, you know, how we were anti-Second Amendment, you know, 'we don't believe in the Constitution,' and none of that could be further from the truth,” he said. “We just didn't want to sell the assault-style weapons that could inflict that kind of damage."

But after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School massacre, Stack learned that his company had previously sold the shooter a firearm.

“We found out that we sold this kid a shotgun," Stack told CBS News. "That's when I said, 'We're done.'"

“Even though it wasn't the gun he used. It could have been,” he added.

“We did everything by the book, and we did everything that the law required, and he was still able to buy a gun,” the CEO told Good Morning America at the time.

The company also changed its sales policy, and stopped selling firearms to people under the age of 21.

“The whole hunting business is an important part of our business, and we know there is going to be backlash on this,” Stack told The Inquirer in March of 2018. “[But] if the kids in Parkland are being brave enough to stand up and do this, we can be brave enough to stand up with them.”

Stack said that the move has cost the company a quarter of a billion dollars, but that he’s still considering pulling back firearms sales even more, CBS News reported.

He has already removed all firearms from 125 of the chain’s 729 stores, according to The Hill.

Stack said the ban may extend to all store locations in the future.

“The whole category is under strategic review,” he told CBS News with a laugh.

Stack acknowledged that such a move won’t stop mass shootings, but argued that “it’s worth it” if it “saves one life.”

2

Comments (46)

Sort: Oldest

No. 1-22

flybynight

Oct 9, 2019

Get woke, go broke. Great plan.

tfort

Oct 9, 2019

This is a brilliant business move. Their stock price dropped, Ducks Sporting Goods did a stock buy back and the stock price INCREASED.

Hats off to Dick’s. You sure know how to support you stock holders.

Janken

Oct 9, 2019

I dont believe that. First if all the company that makes them didnt get hurt and i cant think of a businessman doing that

JBo

Oct 9, 2019

Three years ago the stock price was $60. Today, $39.

Woobie46

Oct 9, 2019

This guy is mad. He probably should have used one of those weapons to take himself out. He's mad as a hatter!

Shastabeau

Oct 9, 2019

Why didn't they just give them to LE or Swat? Complete idiot decision!

Lesstalkmoreaction

Oct 9, 2019

Virtue-signaling is expensive.

flybynight

Oct 9, 2019

So please explain how getting rid of AR-15 AK-47 changes anything. Can some nut shoot you with another type of weapon? Or for that matter a knife or baseball bat. I mean really.

2 Replies

Sort: Newest

tfort

Oct 10, 2019

You are correct, you can be killed in a multitude of ways. Stack (CEO) made a business decision that in the long run will serve the investors well.

flybynight

Oct 10, 2019

Time will tell if he made a good business decision or not so when it blows up in his face it will be interesting to see which if any trolls show up and say gee, I guess I/ we were wrong.

les0060

Oct 10, 2019

What a Dick

david_boots2000

Oct 10, 2019

The second ammendment has nothing to do with hunting. It was formed to prevent government tyerinie. With modern technology , how shall we fight , with black powder weapons! Anyone that thinks government suppression isn't possible is crazy. There's an illness in this country that needs to be addressed, not government control of weapons with leagal civilians.

copper347

Oct 10, 2019

Ok. The stock holders need to hold this ass clown to account. He needs to pay back all the money it cost in destroying the stock instead of returning it to the manufactures for compensation.

pat901$aol.com

Oct 10, 2019

Did Dick's Sporting goods turn over the list of serial numbers of the destroyed guns to the ATF....???

BatCrapCrazy

Oct 10, 2019

So they sold a mental midget a shotgun and decide to get rid of all their AR style rifles. Freaking genius.

61mouse

Oct 10, 2019

Another " FAST AND FURIOUS"

Anomie88

Oct 10, 2019

Oh does that you make you feel better? Pat yourself on the back . Another liberal millionaire who pretends he is changing the world. If you really care about people in this country, your company could have donated that half a billion to needy people, crumbling schools and outdated infrastructure. Idiot.

KnucklesL

Oct 10, 2019

Holly Matkin, why do you even state "Instead of returning the unsold merchandise to manufacturers..." when that isn't a possibility? Retailers typically purchase firearms like these from distributors or wholesalers, not manufacturers, and depending on Dick's relationship with its suppliers, they may or may not be able to return them to the entity from whom they purchased them. Please don't mislead your readers, especially if you're unfamiliar with how things work.

Gwaybel

Oct 11, 2019

Folks that buy guns and ammo also buy other sporting equipment. I say we need to find other places to spend our money.

Patriot1midwestern

Oct 13, 2019

I haven't walked into a Dick's since they virtue signaled...... There are plenty of competitor's to choose from....

PO2313

Oct 13, 2019

Idiot.

EskaAmin

Oct 14, 2019

That they quit selling them? I do not care. They they (supposedly) destroyed 5m in weapons, disappointing and depressing, but again don't care (much). That he crows about it to receive high fives and back slaps. That I care about. If you are going to protest something that protest in quiet. If I decide not to frequent a business, I simply do not go. I see no reason to grandstand to receive approval. Did he check with his suppliers? His employees? His shareholders? Doubtful. But instead he decided, for all of them, to take a major loss. I was never a fan of DSG's to begin with. Overpriced. Now to cover the cost of this asinine reaction, all will pay the price. While only he will reap the rewards(?) from the far(out) left. If he wanted to stop selling then sell off the current inventory and don't restock. Thats all. No crowing needed.

AlParsonsChicago

Oct 17, 2019

I hope this action will reduce the chances that a blue (or anyone) gets shot. I don't know of any stat or study to support that result, but hope doesn't require facts. As far as costing them lots, sure does. But the CEO's continued employment in that role, is governed by the board, which is elected by the shareholders. So if the shareholders don't like it, they have remedy. Be safe! (new poster here, trying not to offend)

Vodkabreakfast

Oct 17, 2019

Most men of his vintage tend to have courage in their convictions - a perspective in life that is honed by decades of experience in life and it’s dealings, and tend to understand that popular doesn’t always equal correct. I see this man enjoys being the exception.